Bhim Sain Garg , Jaipur vs Department Of Income Tax

Jh vkj-ih-rksykuh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Vh-vkj-ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM

vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 223/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09

Dy. Commissioner of cuke Shri Bhim Sain Garg Income Tax, Circle-6, Vs. through L/H Shailendra Garg, Jaipur. Mohan House, 20, Transport Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABDPG 1026 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent

jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Neena Jeph (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Anil Sharma (CA)

lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 25/05/2015 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 25/05/2015

vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: R.P. TOLANI, J.M.

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated

30/12/2011 passed by the learned CIT(A)-II, Jaipur for A.Y. 2008-09.

The sole ground of appeal is reproduced as under:-

2 ITA 223/JP/2012_ DCIT Vs. Bhim Sain Garg

"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance made by the A.O. treating the discount shown by the assessee as commission and not deducting TDS on the same U/s 194H of the IT Act, 1961."

2. Since the assessee Shri Bhim Sain Garg has expired. Ld. DR has

made an application for bringing on record the name of legal heir Shri

Shailendra Garg, who is son of the deceased Shri Bhim Sain Garg.

3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has no objection. He also, at the

outset, has submitted that similar issue arose in the assessee's own

case which has been decided by the Hon'ble ITAT vide order dated

13/02/2015 passed in ITA No. 325/JP/2012 The finding of the Hon'ble

ITAT is reproduced as under:-

"In the consideration of entirety of facts and circumstances, we hold that the amount paid by way of discount to the advertisement agencies, springs from a relationship on principal to principal basis and does not constitute commission as contemplated by provisions of Section 194H of the Act. In view thereof, we see no infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A) in holding that the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are not applicable and thereby deleting the disallowances. The order of the learned CIT(A) is upheld."

3 ITA 223/JP/2012_ DCIT Vs. Bhim Sain Garg

4. The ld DR concedes about the Hon'ble ITAT's order.

5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and

perused the material available on the record. By respectfully following

our own above order passed by this very Bench in assessee's own

case. The revenue's appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25/05/2015.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼Vh-vkj-ehuk½ ¼vkj-ih-rksykuh½ (T.R. Meena) (R.P.Tolani) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member

Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 25th May, 2015 *Ranjan

vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur.

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Shri Bhim Sain Garg through L/H- Sh.

Shailendra Garg, Jaipur.

3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT

4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A)

5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 223/JP/2012)

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar